Dancing with the Devil

The Consequences of Consequentialism

I was surprised to learn that “ritual magic” was considered an admirable endeavor in the Middle Ages. Before the idea of witchcraft per se, the learned men of Europe (astronomers / astrologers / alchemists and the like) had ritualistic ways of summoning demons to serve them. By the time you get to Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus in the sixteenth century, the Church’s condemnation of such practices made sorcery suspect and frightening - as one would think it should always be.

But no.

Here’s Norman Cohn from Europe’s Inner Demons …

Whether the magician was trying to scale the heights of scholarship in a flash or whether he was trying to make men kill one another, he set about it in a most pious fashion. Nowhere, in the surviving books of magic, is there a hint of Satanism. Nowhere is it suggested that the magician should ally himself with the demonic hosts, or do evil to win the favour of the Prince of Evil. Not a word is said about reversing or profaning religious rituals or observances, whether Christian or Jewish. The demons are not to be worshipped but, on the contrary, mastered and commanded; and this is to be done through the power of the God who created all spirits as well as all human beings. Throughout, the attitude is that of a devout man who can with confidence call on God for help in his undertaking. Indeed, all the books of magic stress that a magical enterprise has no prospect of success unless the magician worships God and believes absolutely in his infinite goodness.

In other words, if you’re holy enough, the demons will obey you and you can make use of them. You can use evil means to attain a good end - and whether my modern readers believe in demons or not, the symbolism could not be more clear: the good may use the worst to achieve the best: even devils are useful if they bring us power.

And this is exactly what my former friends in the Super Catholic world think, especially about the traitorous orange devil that they’ve elected president. They think he won’t tarnish them or ruin any hopes of winning people over to their faith simply because they think they’re holy and so they can make use of very unholy things.

They will master him; he won’t master them. They aren’t selling their souls to this devil; they’re only leasing them. Their politics can’t be morally repugnant; they pray novenas, after all. They are willing to risk the destruction of democracy and our culture because they set about it in a most pious fashion.

The Church eventually condemns ritual magic, most clearly with a papal bull in the year 1320. But the magicians protested …

… the pope and the cardinals have themselves been deceived by the Devil [the magicians say]. In the magic arts, spirits are compelled to act against their will - and this is something that only the pure of heart can achieve [the magicians say]; the wicked are therefore unable to practise the art with any success.

Back in the day, Dawn Eden Goldstein and I, along with many others, critiqued Christopher West and his bastardized “Theology of the Body”. West said that you need not practise “custody of the eyes”. If you were holy enough, you could stare at naked ladies all day long. Hugh Hefner was West’s hero. West could admire a pornographer because West was pure of heart. One would assume you could view even the most vile of pornography all day long, if you set about it in a most pious fashion.

This is, of course, ridiculous.

If you dance with the devil, you’ll end up paying the piper.