The Condemnation of Astrology

1

The Secret Vatican Archives and Pope Sixtus the Fifth

2

Alan J. Ouimet, O.F.S.A Jesuit speaks to Irish astrologers

In 1993 the late Father Laurence L. Cassidy, S.J., a Jesuit priest andtheologian at Saint Peter’s College, New Jersey addressed the Irish Astrological Association (IAA) about their concerns over the forthcoming publication of the 1994 English edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church which had been rumored to prohibit the study and practice of astrology. Father Cassidy, an astrologer himself, assured them it did not, noting the Catechism was not teaching “new doctrine” and was in accord with the traditions of the Church.

Many astrologers and their clients are not aware of the Church’s permissive tradition on astrology. Some think it is condemned outright. Some would say “who cares?” Others may simply dismiss the question as simply a religious or theological debate of no consequence. Yet C.G. Jung felt “of all his patients over the age of forty there was not one whose problem was not essentially religious innature.” Religious beliefs are important. Today, with the increasing secularization of society, religious denominations are taking more defensive and conservative postures leading in some cases to prejudices of the past. In the process, astrology has all too often had to assume a defensive posture. However, as Father Cassidy tried to point out, this is quite unnecessary.

What follows is the story of two papal efforts to change the traditional Church praxis on astrology long held permissible, with certain constraints, for over three hundred years from the 13th to the16th century. The attempts in the person of two popes, Sixtus V (1585 – 1590) and Urban VIII (1623 -1644), to forbid or otherwise constrain astrological predictions failed through lack of support by successive papal administrations and the papal congregations serving them. The innovations, considered reactionary had contradicted a long held tradition established by two great 13th century saints of the Church, Saints Albert the Great (1206 – 1280) and Thomas Aquinas (c.1227 –

3

1274) , as well as the great 18 year ecumenical council, the Council of Trent convened in 1645.

In 1998 Pope John Paul II (1978 – 2005) opened the Vatican Secret Archives to scholars specializing in modern European history. The results of their research were published by the Cambridge University Press in 2001 under the title Church, Censorship and Culture in Early Modern Europe edited by Gigiola Fragnito. 1 The archives have been the final resting place of the files of two 16th Century papal congregations charged with oversight in heretical matters – the Congregation of the Holy Inquisition and the Congregation of the Index. Founded in the 16th

century and staffed by high ecclesiastical officials, both congregations worked hand in hand to offset the damaging effect of thenewly founded printing press used by Protestant propagandists. For thefirst time in over four hundred years files were opened revealing important issues surrounding the 16th century debate among papal congregations over the Church’s position on astrology. Prior to this discovery, little was known concerning the infighting among papal congregations and the popes they served. This seminal material discloses not only the reasons for the rejection of a complete ban on judicial astrology but also, because astrology was not found offensiveto the Faith, why such a rejection, tout court, would be highly ambiguous. It was the issuance of Coeli et terrae by Sixtus that brought the issue to a head.

“We decree and declare against astrologers”

Some twenty-three years after Pope Pius V (1566 – 1572) defined what type of astrological books were offensive to the faith, an event took place changing the Church’s policy on astrology virtually overnight. On January 5, 1586, not yet one year into his papal reign, Pope SixtusV, issued the following papal decree condemning outright all forms of judicial astrology. The decree, written in Latin takes its name, Coeli et terrae creator deus, from its opening line, “God, Creator of Heaven and earth.” It states in part

1

4

“God, Creator of Heaven and Earth, the Omnipotent One, gave to man, whom he created in his own image and likeness, a mind colored not only by the divine light of faith, so that he might not only know the mysteries which surpass human reason… nonetheless he made him in such a

way that he might comprehend such profound matters not as an haughty animal, but rather that he would fear, and prostrate on the ground and venerate the immense majesty of his Maker. …To Himself alone did God reserve the knowledge of those things that will come to pass and the awareness of future matters…There are no true arts or branches of study which seek foreknowledge of future events and chance happenings. Future events, with some exceptions, come about necessarily or at least frequently from natural causes which owe nothing to divination. … Some people…run after curiosities and so gravely offend God. They err and bring others into error. Prime examples are the astrologers. They employ an idle, false knowledge of the planets and stars, and with the utmost audacity busy themselves now with anticipating a revelation of God’s arrangement of things…They take the moment a child was conceived, or its birthday, or some other ridiculous observation and note of times and

circumstances and, from this, rashly presume to foretell, judge and pronounce upon each person’s rank and situation, how his life will proceed…other fortunate and unfortunate events which may come his way… Therefore, WE condemn and reject all types of divination…by this decree, which will be forever valid, and by Our Apostolic authority, We decree and declare against astrologers…and any others who practice the art of what is called judicial astrology (with the exception of those who make predictions in relation to agriculture, navigation and medicine); also against those who dare to cast and interpret people’s birth-horoscopes with a view to foretelling future events – be these contingent, successive or fortuitous – or actions dependent upon human will, even if the astrologer maintains or testifies that he is not saying anything for certain …”2

2 Ugo Baldini, The Roman Inquisition’s Condemnation of Astrology: Antecedents, Reasons and Consequences in Church, Censorship and Culture in Modern Italy, by Gigliola Fragnito (ed) and translated by Adrian Belton Cambridge University Press, 2001. One error is remarkable for thisreputable scholar. He writes on page 84 “The prohibitions issued until the fifteenth century by ecumenical, national and provincial councils and enacted in the bulls of Honorious III

5

The timing of the decree was curious. It was the vigil feast of the Magi. Why condemn astrology on the day celebrating the coming of the “wise men” who were astrologers? If the author of Saint Matthew’s Gospel saw fit to open his infancy narrative with astrology serving the designs of Providence, why condemn its study and practice? Was this something personal with the new pope or was it part of a broader effort?

(1225), John XXII Super illus specula (1326) and Innocent VIII Summis desiderantes affectibus (1485) often accused the divinatory arts of being forms of devil worship and of strengthening Satan’s grip onmankind, pointing to judicial astrology in particular.” This is incorrect. A review of the bulls of John and Innocent do not mention judicial astrology at all. In the case of Honorious the bull is not identified. However the relationship of Honorious and Michel Scot, a cleric and the most pre-eminent astrologer of his day, was more that generous. It is highly unlikely Pope Honorious issued a decree against judicial astrology while at the same timeawarding one of the most famous astrologers of the age with several benefices.

2. P.G.Maxwell-Stuart, The Occult in Early Modern Europe: A Documentary History. New York, 1999, pp. 111-112 for partial translation.. For a fulltranslation see Harold B. Johnson, A Horoscope Cast on the Birth of King Sebastian of Portugal (1554-1578), Appendix 3, pp. 16 – 18 (2001). http:people.virginia.edu/~hbj8n.

3. Nicholas Cheetham, Keepers of the Keys: A History of the Popes from St. Peter to John Paul II, New York, 1983, p.214. 4. Irene Polverini Fosi, Justice and its image: Political propaganda and judicial reality in the pontificate of Sixtus V in The Sixteenth Century Journal, Kirkesville: Spring, 1993, Volume 24, p.76 Issue 1, p. 76.

5. Catholic Encyclopedia (1919) online at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14033a.htm.

6

Born ruler or source of embarrassment?

Any reading of Sixtus, as a person, describes him as being a loner, ambitious, condescending and impatient. He was not a collegial pope feeling he had no peers. He had joined the Franciscan Order founded bythe humble Saint Francis of Assisi. According to one historian, however, he was the “most ungentle of Franciscans.” 3 A papal judicial historian, describes him as “rejecting mildness as a virtue unfitting to a sovereign” and bringing to that office “the traits of the Grand Inquisitor” with an “obsession” to mete out papal justice.4 Stating he was a “born ruler” the Catholic Encyclopedia describes him as exterminating banditry in the Papal States “with excessive cruelty.” 5

Given the prestigious intellectual position of astrological thought inacademia and in high ecclesiastical circles, including the Papal Court, it is reasonable to wonder if Sixtus fully appreciated the gravity of his condemnation and the problem it would present to the succeeding generations of the Church. Reportedly, when he served as the Inquisitor to Venice thirty-six astrological volumes lined his bookshelves.6 However, there is no extant information suggesting, unlike his predecessor Pope Sixtus IV (1471-1484) and his distant successor Pope Urban VIII (1623-1644), that he either used astrologersor studied it himself. Although an intelligent man, his fame, as a Franciscan friar, came for his preaching ability.

From all accounts he lacked the patience to be a true scholar seen in some unsuccessful efforts in that direction. His attempt to provide anewly edited version of the Vulgate Bible, on which he worked alone, had to be recalled and revised due to its many errors.7 Cardinal Robert

under Pope Sixtus V.

6. Corinne Mandel, Sixtus the Fifth and the Lateran Palace, Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, Libreria della Stato, Roma (1994).p 99 n.30

7. Op Cit., Catholic Enclyclopedia online

613. For an English translation of the Summa www.newadvent.org/summa/3095.htm.

7

Bellarmine (1542-1621), the famous prosecutor of Galileo, on the deathof Sixtus, urged the Bible’s recall lest it embarrass the Church and the infallibility of the Pope then sensitive to the Protestant reformers.8 Prior to becoming pope, he spent years editing the works ofSaint Ambrose (340 – 397). One church historian noted the Sixtus edition on Ambrose “as the worse ever published.”9

There is no extant record available that suggests why Sixtus issued such a bull. Was it personal or did he represent broader forces at work in the Church? His fear of demonic influence reverberates clearlyin the bull hearkening back to the theology of St. Augustine now overshadowed by Aquinas. However Sixtus, himself a Franciscan friar, would have known the Franciscan Order was no stranger to astrological discourse. Such Franciscan greats as Fra Roger Bacon (c. 1214 – 1294),today honored as one of the the founders of science, Fra Guido Bonatti(d. 1296),10 the author of the Liber Astronomicus considered the greatest astrological work of the 13th century most likely written in a Franciscan cell and Fra Duns Scotus, mentioned by Father Cassidy as onthe path to sainthood and many others considered astrological discourse as a great universal symphony involving the power of God in their daily lives. The 15th Century Franciscan saint, Bernardino of Siena (1380 – 1444), the “Apostle of Italy,” accepted “the governance of the planets and signs and constellations”. Whenever he preached against astrologers he did as did Saints Albert and Thomas. Leaving noroom for free will and predicting with certitude “is all openly and clearly heresy and sin” said Bernardino. 11 Whatever Sixtus’ reasons, broader forces were at work in the Church insuring the status quo anteestablished by Pope Pius V and the Council of Trent, a position well founded on the scientific thinking of Saint Albert and the theologicalformulas of Saint Thomas Aquinas.

Supporters of Astrology – St. Albert and St. Thomas but divination forbidden

Saint Albert and his disciple, Saint Thomas were both members of the Order of Preachers, also known as the Dominican Order, named after

8

their founder Saint Dominic. Famous as the teaching order of the Church, the Dominicans were the insurers and enforcers of doctrinal

orthodoxy as the primary principals of theHoly Inquisition. The Dominican doctrinal tour de force was the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. Formulated on the twin pillars of faith and reason any rules, in matters of theology and orthodoxy followedby the Holy Inquisition, followed the precepts of Thomas. It was the scientific reasoning of Albert and the theological opinion of Thomas on which astrology founda credible place as a bona fide science inChristendom.

Albert was very generous in his opinion ofastrology. His Speculum Astronomiae presentedastrology as the “middle science” between metaphysics and natural philosophy. He

advanced its importance to the Christian faith as it “more intensely provokes men to love God.” Speaking of the judgment of the stars foundin the ordering of the planets he states “no human science attains this ordering of the universe as perfectly as does the science of the judgment of the stars.” He advanced the use of mundane astrology, natal astrology, revolutions and interrogations (horary astrology). Concerning interrogations he was comfortable with “interrogations for advice” but concerned with “interrogations of fact” which may inhibit free will. 12

Thomas did not concern himself with the specifics of astrology as did his mentor, Albert. He was interested in the theological problem of divination, which for him was the prediction of an event with certitude. Question 95, Article 5 in the Summa Theologica addresses the issue, Whether divination by the stars is unlawful? Aquinas’ cautiously affirmed that astrologers can sometimes predict future events because human behavior derives mostly from bodily passions through the inclining influences of the planets, a position he borrowed not only from Albertbut also from Saint Augustine. One could predict with certitude astronomical matters, such as the timing of a forthcoming eclipse; onecould predict in astrological matters as to the meaning of the eclipse

9

in terms of human behavior, but such a prediction could not be done with certitude. Such divination was unlawful.13 The long held prohibition of astrology by Saint Augustine yielded to the cautious acceptance of Thomas as interpreted by the Church overriding any previous objections to its practice.

So profoundly influential was Thomas on the mind of the Church that every session of the Council of Trent (1545 – 1563) saw his Summa Theologica standing alongside the Bible on the main altar. 14 At Trent asimple formula was put in place concerning astrological books not offensive to the Faith. Promulgated under the signature of Pope Pius V“Rule IX” of the Ten Rules on the Prohibition of Books concerned itself only with the censoring of unacceptable astrological publications. It stated

“The bishops shall diligently see to it that books, treatises, catalogues determining destiny by astrology, which in the matter of future events, consequences, or fortuitous occurrences, or of actions that depend on the human will, attempt to affirm something as certain to take place,are not read or possessed. Permitted, on the other hand, are the opinions and natural observations which have been written in the interest of navigation, agriculture or the medical art.” 15

Publishable books then were those in which the doctrine of astrological prediction did not reach the level of divination – predictions born of necessity and certain to happen. Judicial astrology, though not expressly stated, that avoided predictions with certitude would not run afoul of Rule IX. This ruling, however, created a problem for the bull. Sixtus, unwittingly or not, contradicted Thomas when he declared “… even if the astrologer maintains that he isnot saying anything for certain.” The problem was not quickly resolved. In August 1590 Sixtus died suddenly from either malaria or poisoning by

his rival, the Spanish monarch. Within a year and a half, between September 1590 and January 1592, there were three popes, all short lived leaving dormant the problems created by the bull.

Papal stability came with the election of Pope Clement VIII (1592 – 1605). One of the

10

first items brought to his attention was a need for clarification of Coeli et terrae. Requests were coming from various academic institutions in the Papal States through the peripheral offices of the Holy Inquisition. The publication and use of various astrological texts hadcaused great consternation. After all, one could be sent to the galleys if sentenced under the ruling of the bull. The question for Pope Clement was whether to bring Church teaching back into accord with the Council of Trent by invalidating the legislation of his predecessor?

The Bull stands but…ambiguity reigns

The issue must have been sensitive. The Protestant Reformation was going full speed and the Papacy was the bulls-eye. Clement not only had to deal with repealing a papal bull but concurrently had to somehow recall the error ridden Sixtus Bible to avoid papal embarrassment. The stakes were high. Bellarmine, a Jesuit with a special vow to defend the papacy, wrote to Pope Clement “Your holinessknows…Sixtus placed himself and the entire Church in danger by wishingto correct the Bible according to his own knowledge and I am not sure the Church has ever run a greater risk.”16 He believed in papal supremacy and the honor of the office even though he disliked Sixtus. We are told, “Uppermost in Bellarmine’s mind was this: popes must never be seen to condemn the solemn decrees of their predecessors. That would reflect badly on papal authority. “17How to act without damaging the office of the papacy apparently was the issue? Was Coeli et terrae seen as a solemn decree? Or was it just another papal bull in a long series of legislative edicts?

The language of Coeli et terrae complicated its possible recall as it authoritatively said in part “Therefore, by this decree, which will be forever valid, and by our Apostolic authority, We decree and declare against astrologers…” suggesting strong papal intent to be enforced in perpetuity. Although Bellarminebelieved the bull contradicted Church teaching he cautioned against its formal repeal and Pope Clement ruled accordingly. In 1592 he ordered the bull be interpreted according to Rule IX regardless of itscontradiction on the issue of predictive certitude. It is apparent,

11

however, the real concern was not astrological but the credibility of papal authority.

Documents in the Vatican Secret Archives revealed however that the dispute did not end there. Five years later, in 1597, Clement had to deal again with the confusion over Coeli et terrae as “complaints were coming every day” to the Congregation of the Index. Further, by this time, “the majority of the Congregation of the Index opposed the rigorof the bull” and “without pressing for repeal they were inclined towards non-observance.” Apparently, according to these documents,

38. James Broderick, S.J., Robert Bellarmine: Saint and Scholar, London, 1961, p116 – 119. Bellarmine, asked Pope Gregory XIV in 1591 what “he should do about the Bible of Sixtus V in which many regrettable changes had been made…I showed the Holy Father that, instead of forbidding the edition of the Bible in question, it would be better tocorrect it in such a manner that it could be published without detriment to the honor of Pope Sixtus. The result could be achieved byremoving inadvisable changes as quickly as possible and then issuing the volume with Sixtus’ own name upon it, and a preface stating that owing to haste some errors crept into the first edition through the fault of the printers or some other persons.”

9. Peter Godman, The Saint as Censor: Robert Bellarmine between Inquisition and the Index, Brill, 2000 pp. 64, 150.

410. Bonatti’s membership in the Franciscan Order has been questioned by some. John Lenhart O.F.M. Cap. Science in the Franciscan Order: A Historical Sketch in Franciscan Studies, Vol. 1, January, 1924. claims Guido Bonatti for the Order. Lenhart describes Bonatti as “The celebrated physicist, astronomer and astrologer… of Forli (d.1296), a Friar Minor” who “drew scholars to his professional chair from all parts of Europe.” Lenhart’s source is the Annales Minorum by Father Luke Wadding,OFM, a celebrated 17th century friar scholar using the Order’s records from the 13th Century. Lynn Thorndike, The History of Magic and Experimental Science, V.2, p.828 notes the argument about his membership in the Orderand accepts the possibility stating “…judging from the number of Franciscans who have written books on astrology and astrological medicine, he might not have found such retirement entirely uncongenial, and need scarcely have surrendered his astrological views

12

Clement’s decision had not been successfully disseminated throughout Christendom leading to an unequal application of the law. Attempting to clarify the papal position the Congregation referred the matter back to Pope Clement in form of a question “whether the constitution (bull) relative to judicial astrology was still in force?” The response was “no” for the following reasons: Pope Clement was opposed to the bull; the bull had not been accepted as valid by the Congregation of the Decretals; the rules of the Congregation of the Index contradict it; the offices of the Inquisition followed Rule IX of the Council of Trent. The final decision, in 1597, ruled that publications of judicial astrology written by Christians were to be corrected if predictions were made with certitude; all pagan classicalastrological books could be published even if they espoused certitude.18

in consequence.” Kenelin Henry Digby , Mores Catholici: or Ages of Faith, London, 1847, v.3, p. 419 wrote that Wadding “styles him (Bonatti) as a philosopher” and “at an advanced age embraced the Order of Saint Francis in the Province of Bologna and humbly and holily terminated his life.” It has been argued that Bonatti’s membership in the Order has been confused with that of his notable client, Guido of Montefeltro who also entered the Order later in life. However, the latter was a member of the Province of Umbria, not Bologna, and died in Assisi. Liber Astronomicus, considered by Lynn Thorndike as “the most important astrological work produced in Latin in the thirteenth century” might well have been written within the walls of a Franciscanfriary.

11. Franco Mormando, The Preacher’s Demons: Bernardino of Siena and the SocialUnderworld of Early Renaissance Italy, Chicago/London, 1999 p.97 – 100.

512. Paola Zambelli, The Speculum Astronomiae and its Enigma: Astrology, Theology and Science in Albertus Magnus and his Contemporaries, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 135, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1992. An English /Latin translation of the Speculum appears in the Appendix section.

8

13

An inscrutable Pope and his bull, Inscrutabilis

It was not until thirty-eight years after the death of Sixtus that oneof his successors, Pope Urban VIII felt the need to again legislate constraints on judicial astrology. Urban was an unlikely heir of Sixtus’ cause as he was an ardent student of astrology and its unlikely foe. During the interregnum of Pope Sixtus and Pope Urban it was said that ‘there is not a cardinal, nor a prelate, nor a prince who does not possess an astrological analysis of his birth horoscope with predictions of good fortune.” 19 Reportedly Urban himself had natal charts of all his Cardinals to determine their longevity. 20 Yet,an event would occur that led him to reaffirm the provisions of Coeli et terrae. The story surrounding this reaffirmation has a certain humor to it and is brilliantly reported in Brendan Dooley’s Morandi’s Last Prophecy and the End of Renaissance Politics (2002). Briefly, while Pope Urban was still in good health an influential astrologer, Father Orazio Morandi, the abbot of the important monastery of Santa Prasaede on the outskirts ofRome, predicted, in 1629, the death of the pope the following year. For confirmation he sought the concurrence of other astrologers. Word got out and Cardinals began arriving for a papal conclave to elect a new pope. Surprised at their arrival and learning of their intent, Urban was outraged. Morandi was imprisoned, along with others and diedsuspiciously in prison shortly thereafter.

Fearing the astrological prediction correct, Urban secretly called on the most famous astrologer in Europe at the time, Father Tommaso Campanella, O.P. (1568 – 1639), a Dominican theologian and controversial practitioner of astrological magic. Eventually, with thepublication of Campanella’s book, Astrologicorum Libri VI, which included a chapter on astrological magic, the rumors were confirmed the pope was involved in such activities to ward off the evil effects of the forthcoming eclipse. Embarrassed and outraged at his exposure, Urban issued the bull Inscrutabilis iudiciorum Dei (Unsearchable judgments of God) on AprilFool Day, 1631. In addition to reaffirming Coeli et terrae it prohibited especially the drawing up of nativities on popes and royalty and their

1

14

relatives, unto the third degree of consanguinity under the penalty ofdeath.

The major question became – did Urban reaffirm Coeli et terrae according tothe mind of Sixtus or that of Clement and Trent? Evidence strongly suggests that Urban preferred the mind of the latter, Clement and Trent. The historian D.P. Walker notes Campanella and Urban maintained a good relationship after the event and Campanella may havehelped Urban compose the papal bull. Advancing this position, Walker notes Campanella was given papal permission to start the College Barberino in Rome in 1630 which would include astrological instruction. Further, only three months before Urban issued the bull, Campanella practiced his astrological magic on the nephew of the Pope leading Walker to remark “The statement that he helped to draft Urban’s anti-astrological bull may well be correct.” 21

Further evidence the bull was interpreted according to Trent is given by historian Lynn Thorndike in his magisterial work, History of Magic and Experimental Science. He notes that both John Baptiste Morin and Antonious Petrus de Magistris Galathei state the bull was interpreted to agree with the Council of Trent and the doctrine of Aquinas. Petrusstates “the majority of the theologians regard the bull (Coeli et terrae) as not binding in the forum of conscience…” 22 Further evidence can be gleaned from the Inquisition’s guidebooks and case studies.

Martin del Rio S.J. sets the pace

Prior to the Sixtus papacy, one of the most popular manuals used by the Inquisition was the Malleus Mallificarum

(Hammer of Heretics) published by the Dominican Order. Published in the late 15th century to hunt down witches it supported the astrology permitted by Albert and Thomas. One whole chapter is spent showing whythe planets, which are creatures of God, cannot by their very nature

15

be the cause of evil and therefore not the source of witchcraft. Astrology appears exonerated of any malfeasance. Pope Sixtus, however with his condemnation of astrology, inaugurated new cautious thinking for a new century. New guidelines were needed.

The most notable manual used by the 17th Century Inquisition was written by Father Martin Antonio del Rio S.J. (1551 – 1608). In 1599 –1600, only three years after Pope Clement issued his ruling that Coeli et terrae was no longer in effect. Speaking of Rio’s Disquisitionum magicarum libri sex, (Investigations into Magic) one historian notes “Del Rio accepted the boundary between lawful and unlawful astrology but maintained that some human events, collective or individual, were due to natural phenomena produced by astral influences thereby seeking to legitimate traditional sectors of astrology.” Del Rio’s work was denounced anonymously to the Inquisition and examined in 1604. Nothing came of

7

14. Aterni Patris, Enclyclical of Pope Leo XIII on the Restoration of Christian Philosophy, Sec.31. Accessable online at www.newadvent.org/library/docs_le13ae.htm. In this papal encyclical, written in 1896, Pope Leo called for the restoration of the teachings of Saint Thomas as the beacon for all theologians. “Ite ad Thomae” – “go to Thomas” he beckoned noting that Thomas was so esteemed during the Council of Trent that his Summa Theologica stood alongside the Gospels on the main altar through all itssessions lasting eighteen years.

15. Rules of Prohibited Books, Modern History Sourcebook: Council of Trent atwww.fordham.edu/halsal/mod/trent-bookrules.html.

16. op.cit Godman p.141

17. Peter DeRosa, Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy, New York, 1988, p.219

18. op cit Baldini, pp. 95-96.

16

the matter and his work went into 20 editions, carrying the required “superiorum permissu” of the Church with the last printing in 1750. His magnum opus was used by both Catholic and Protestant authorities, the latter during the Salem Witch trials in 1695.

Rio accepted three types of astrology – governance of nativities, revolutions, and electional astrology. He states “The astrologer who does not depart from general principles and those guiding premises which are immediately relevant can, in accordance with the canons of his art, predict with accuracy general events many years, perhaps,

19. Germana Ernst, Astrology, religion and politics in Counter-Reformation Rome, in Science, Culture and Popular Belief in Renaissance Europe edited by Stephen Pomfrey, Paolo L. Rossi and Maurice Slawinski, Manchester Unversity Press, 1991 p. 268

20. Germana Ernst, Tomasso Campanella: The Book and the Body of Nature, Springer, 2010, p.210Ernst states that Pope Urban “boasted of knowing the birth charts of all the Cardinals and consulted the horoscope of the old Duke of Urbino in order to identify when he would finally quit the scene so that he could take possession of the state.”

21. D.P. Walker, Spiritual and Demonic Magic from Ficino to Campanella University Park, PA, 2000, pp. 208 - 209

22. Lynn Thorndike, History of Magic and Experimental Science, New York, 1941, v. 6, pp.165, 171, 178.

23. op cit. Baldini, p.102

24. Ana Avalos, As Above, So Below. Astrology and the Inquistion in Seventeenth Century New Spain, Thesis Presentation, European University Institute, Department of History and Civilization, 2007 p. 160 available at www. cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/6938/2007_02_ Avalos .pdf ?...

25. Tayra M,C, Lanuza-Navarro and Ana Cecilia Avalos-Flores, Astrological Prophecies and the Inquisition in the Iberian World,p.686 – 687. A paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2nd ICESHS in 2006. Available at

17

unless either his calculations or his instruments deceive him… Any astrology which goes further than these three methods and predicts anyevent as certain is simply illicit and superstitious. Any divination of this kind is uncertain and insubstantial and unworthy to be called art or knowledge”. 23

Some case studies in New Spain

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/15611640/Astrological-prophecies-and-the-Inquisition-inthe-Iberian-World

26. Ibid. 687 – 688.

27. Officiorum ac Menurm, Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on The Prohibtion and Censorship ofBooks. An English translation can be located atwww.users.qwest.net/~slrorer/Censorship.htm.

28. Catechism of the Catholic Church , Ignatius Press, 1994, p. 513

29. William Lilly, Annus Tenebrosus or the Dark Year, London, 1652 p.6

30. Laurence Cassidy, S.J., The Old Astrology and the New Catechism is available at www.radical-astrology.com.

31. Laurence Cassidy,S.J., A Believing Christian as a Dedicated Astrologer. This article appeared in numerous astrological journals and is available at http://www.rasa.ws/index.php/rasa-library-articles-believing-christian-astrologer.

32. John L. Allen Jr., All the Popes Men: The Inside Story of How the Vatican Really Thinks, New York, 2006 p. 97

Alan J. Ouimet, O.F.S., a Franciscan tertiary, (Secular Franciscan Order, OFS) has been student of astrology since 1972 and a graduate, with honours, of the Master’s Degree Level Courseof Astrological Studies under Noel Tyl. A graduate of Saint

18

During an inquisition in New Spain, in 1641, fifty-five years after Coeli et terrae and ten years after Inscrutabilis, two Jesuits were called uponby the Spanish Inquisition in Mexico City to adjudicate if one Friar Nicholas de Alarcon was guilty of practicing judicial astrology for raising natal charts for the President of Guatemala. To assist them the Jesuits called on a professor of Mathematics and Astrology at the Royal and Pontifical University of Mexico, Friar Diego Rodriguez. He considered the evidence in the light of both Coeli et terrae and Inscrutabilis and testified the astrology used was lawful as the stars were

John’s University (BA, History) and the University of Connecticut(MA, Political Science) he was an FBI Counterintelligence Agent until his retirement. He is the founder of the Franciscan Family Apostolate (www.openhearts.org) serving the destitute in India and welcomes all coworkers. For his work among the destitute he was awarded in 1987 the Benemerenti papal medal by Pope John PaulII, the F.B.I. Foundation’s Humanitarian Award in 2003 and was a nominee of for the Saint Francis National Peace Award in 2010. Alan has previously published with Considerations magazine and onthe internet. He resides in Madison, CT. and can be reached at ajouimet@att.net.

9

19

represented only as moral and physical inclinations rather than as necessities. Friar Nicholas was acquitted. 24 That a chair of astrology existed at a pontifical university is instructive. More importantly, that natal charts, completely forbidden by Coeli et terrae, were deemed lawful under the inclining influences doctrine is strong evidence the Church returned to the traditional doctrine of inclining influences set forth by Trent in Rule IX and the doctrine of Aquinas. In a study on the publishing of astrological almanacs in New Spain astrologers did not limit themselves to natural astrological predictions “rather they continuously entered into the territory of judicial astrology.” The study noted that, the use of judicial astrology notwithstanding, no Mexican almanacs were forbidden by the Inquisition with the exception of one in 1666. The almanac in questioncontained a dangerous prediction on “conflicts among ecclesiastics andreligious and the destruction of convents.” Censorship trials of several astrologers were examined reflecting quibbling over correct wording. For instance, for an astrologer to say “Mars won’t stop sending” bad influences indicating future turmoil was to predict with certitude, this was unlawful; the astrologer was made to change the statement to “it can be expected that Mars sends.” One Jesuit censor ordered an astrologer to remove from his almanac the phrase “everybodybe careful on the roadways” as it suggested that robberies will occur,a contingent event subject to free will; he also ordered the removal

1011

12

14

1

20

of “a notorious person will die” as death is not a predictable event.25

In the final analysis the study concluded that a review of 16 censors from 1647 to 1700, who used Coeli et terrae and rulings of the Congregationof the Index maintained an ambivalent attitude towards astral determinism and free will. Everything depended on the individual censor. Some built ”fences around the law” prohibiting even what was permitted under the auspices of Thomistic thinking for fear they wouldcross the line into forbidden territory. Some did not. Further, because of this ambivalence, it concluded the end of the 17th century saw the Catholic Church in an “ambiguous” relationship with astrology.It was a “thin line which divided natural astrology and judicial astrology…frequently crossed not only by astrologers but also by the theologians. From Saint Thomas onward, it was not difficult for both of them to find ways to conciliate the dogma of free will and the influence of the stars.” 26The predominant problem, the study concluded, was one of “epistemological jurisdictions.” Unlike today the 17th century did not have the plethora of forecasts and predictionscoming from such soft sciences as history, economics, political science, psychology et al predicting future events through trend studies based on anecdotal information. Astrology was as close as thatcould get challenging the Church’s position on the forecasting of future events.

However, this all changed by the 19th century. By then, the Church’s attitude toward astrology became largely dismissive due to changing scientific paradigms brought on by the Enlightenment. Astrology had lost its favored position in the academy brushed off by the Cartesian world view. Rule IX remained on the books until the issuance of Officiorum ac Munerum (1897) by Pope Leo XIII (1878 – 1903). 27 Replacing Rule IX, Officiorum removed astrology completely and merely states as follows: “It is forbidden to publish, read or keep books in which sorcery, divination, magic, the evocation of spirits, and other superstitions of this kind are taught or commanded.”27

2

21

Except for minor exceptions made by Pope Pius X (1903 – 1914), the Index of Pope Leo was the basis for ecclesiastic positive law until its repeal in 1966, a result of the Second Vatican Council (1962 – 1965) which disbanded the Congregation of the Index altogether.

The dispute is academic not theological

Astrology again became a focus of interest in 1994 with the publication of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Pope John Paul II ordered its publication as a guide for bishops and pastors. It was the first catechism issued since the Council of Trent in the 16th Century but definitely needed due to the reforms of the Second Vatican Council. Section 2116 states the following:

All forms of divination should be rejected; the recourse to Satan or to demons, the evocation of the dead, and other practices which equivalently pretend to “reveal” (sic) the future (cf. Dt. 18, 10; Jr. 29,8). Consultation of horoscopes, astrology, chiromancy, the interpretation of omens and fates, visual phenomena, the recourse to mediums, all these entail a will to power over time, history, and finally, mankind, and, at the same time they manifest a desire to secure protection of occult powers. This constitutes a contradiction with the honor and respect, mixed with loving fear that we owe to God alone.” 28

At first glance it seems to appear quite clear, astrology is condemned. Curiously, though, astrology is given a blanket treatment under “divination” without any of the distinctions of Albert and Thomas. It has none of the intellectual eloquence and understanding one reads on astrology in the Catholic Encyclopedia written at the turn of the century and available at www.newadvent.org suggesting little knowledge of the subject matter itself. Further, there is no reference to the papal bulls by Sixtus V and Urban VIII? Absent all 1

2

2

2

2

2

22

this information and aware of Church tradition and history on the subject what is one to think?Did the Church decide in the 1990’s to null and void Catholic doctrineon astrology by overruling two doctors of the Church as well as one ofthe most eventful ecumenical councils of the Church, the Council of Trent? That is doubtful. Father Cassidy interpreted the Church’s silence within the context of its tradition of accepting some astrological practice as permissible. Of further ambiguity is the statement that astrology is used to have “power over time, history andfinally mankind?” Aren’t these the goals of any social science? Aren’tthese the reasons for psychological, economic, historical and political trend studies reflecting the human need for a predictable and secure future? There is no further elaboration on this point.

It was the occasion of the publication of the Catechism and the ambiguity around Section 2116 that brought Father Cassidy to Ireland to speak to the IAA. His talk recalled that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger,now Pope Benedict XVI, said the Catechism is not teaching “new doctrine”and “articulates the ordinary theological tradition” reminding those present that the Franciscan friar, Duns Scotus, was made a “blessed” by the Church, in 1993, one step away from sainthood. The Church’s investigation of his life and writings over many years, he noted, found no errors in his teaching on faith and morals. These teachings included a belief in astrology appearing in his major work, Opus Oxonienses. On astrology Scotus said “The stars incline the will but in no wise necessitate it. Frequently it comes to pass that astrologers foretell truths concerning the manner of men by reason of their proneness to follow the sensitive appetite…By this means it comes to pass, that he who knows the virtues of the Signs and the Planets therein placed, may foretell, if he knows when any creature is born, of the whole life of it.” 29

Cassidy closed his talk on a positive note “thus the Catechism offersthose of us who wish to demonstrate a rational astrology…an excellentopportunity to educate the wider public that our work involves a

2

23

spiritual science, a search for a cosmic and meaningful theophany in the manner of our Christian ancestors in ages past…It is worthwhile toobserve, yet again, that the Catechism’s strictures against astrology as divination indeed contain no new doctrine but were commonplace among the medieval theologians who, at the same time, fully accepted astrology as a function of natural reason.”30

Concerning the fear of any episcopal disapproval Cassidy addressed this issue in an essay entitled The Believing Christian as a Dedicated Astrologer.” He rhetorically asks and responds “what is the attitude among educatedclergy today towards the theory and practice of astrology?... In this,they follow the consensus of the contemporary academic community who consider it to be an outmoded myth of mediaeval man. But, on the otherhand, there are few indeed who consider the study of astrology any more a matter for ecclesiastical disapproval than they would one's interest in flying saucers or the flat earth society. They do not ignore astrology because it offends their faith, but because it seems to contradict what they believe to be their scientific reason. Of course, I agree with them in their faith, and disagree with them in their reason, but the dispute is academic, not theological.”31

The primary role of papal authority is to insure the continuity of theChurch’s tradition. Pope John Paul II, in 1995 addressed the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly the Holy Inquisition) describing papal authority as “a means of guaranteeing, safeguarding and guiding the Christian community in fidelity to and continuity with tradition, to make it possible for believers to be in contact with the preaching of the Apostles and with the source of Christian reality itself.” 32 Seen in this light, the actions of Pope Clement VIII and Urban VIII make a lot of sense and are in accord with

29

30

31

24

the finest traditions of the Church. They knew the tradition and kept it.

32

25