DIVINATION
50
DIVINATION
human testimony, it cannot be doubted that diviners
foretold some contingent things correctly and magi-
cians produced at times superhuman effects. The
very survival of divination for so many centuries
would otherwise be inexplicable and its role in history
an insoluble problem. On religious grounds, to say
that divination and kindred arts were complete im-
postures would be to contradict Scripture. In it we
read laws forbidding magic, we have facts like the
deeds of Jannes and Mambres before Pharaoh, and we
have a declaration of God showing it possible for a
sign or wonder to be foretold by false prophets and to
come to pa.ss (Deut., xiii, 1-12). But, except when
God gave them knowledge, their ignorance of the
future resulted in the well-known ambiguity of the
oracles.
Attempts to give artificial div'ination a merely nat- ural basis have not succeeded. Chrysippus (de Di- vinatione, ii, 63) spoke about a power in man to recog- nize and interpret signs, and Plutarch (de Oraculis) wrote on the special qualifications an augur should have and the nature of the signs; but a preternatural influence was recognized in the end. Some modes may have been natural in their origin, especially when necessary causes were concerned, and many a predic- tion made without occult intervention, but these must have been comparatively rare, for the client, if not always the seer, generally believed in supernatural assistance. That some analogy may be traced between an eagle and victory, an owl and sadness — though to the Athenians a welcome omen — and that to lose a tooth is to lose a friend, may readily be admitted, but to try to connect these with future contingent events would be to reason badly from a very slight analogy, just as to stab an image, to injure the person it represents, would be to mistake an ideal connexion for a real one. Human instinct demanded a stronger foundation and found it in the belief in an intervention of some supernatural agency. Reason demands the same. A corporeal sign is either an effect of the same cause of which it is a sign, as smoke of fire, or it pro- ceeds from the same cause as the effect which it signi- fies, as the falling of the barometer foretells rain, i. e. the change in the instrument and the change in the weather come from the same cause. Man's future actions and signs in nature stand in no such relation. The sign is not an effect of his future act; neither do the sign and his act proceed from the same cause. The other kinds of signs from living creatures can be passed over by al- most the same reasoning. From those who believed in fatalism, or pantheism, or that man, gods, and nature were all in close communion, or that animals and plants were divinities, a belief in omens and auguries of all kinds might be expected (see Animism). Everywhere, as a matter of fact, divination and sacrifice were so closely connected that no strict line could have been drawn in practice between divination with and without express invocation of gods or demons. The client came to offer sacrifice, and the priest, the diviner, tried to an- swer all his questions, while the private wizards boasted of their "familiar spirits".
Theological Aspect. — From a theological stand- point divination supposes the existence of devils who have great natural powers and who, actuated by jealousy of man and hatred of God, ever seek to lessen His glory and to draw man into perdition, or at least to injure him bodily, mentally, and spiritually. Di- vination is not, as we have seen, foretelling what
- omes from necessity or what generally happens, or
foretelling what God reveals or what can be discov- ered by human effort, but it is the usurpation of knowledge of the future, i. e. arriving at it Ijy inade- quate or improper means. This knowledge is a pre- rogative of Divinity and so the usurper is said to </)'- vine. Such knowledge may not be sought from the evil spirits except rarely in exorcisms. Yet every divination is from them either because they are
expressly invoked or because they mix themselves
up in these vain searchings after the future that they
may entangle men in their snares. The demon is in-
voked tacitly when anyone tries to acquire informa-
tion through means which he knows to be inadequate,
and the means are inadequate when neither from their
own nature nor from any Divine promise are they cap-
able of producing the desired effect. Since the knowl-
edge of futurity belongs to God alone, to ask it tlirectly
or indirectly from demons is to attribute to them a
DiNnne perfection, and to ask their aid is to offer them
a species of worship; this is superstition and a rebel-
lion against the providence of God Who has wisely
hidden many things from us. In pagan times when
divining sacrifice was offered it was idolatry, and even
now divination is a kind of demonolatry or devil-
worship (d'Annibale.) All participation in such at-
tempts to attain knowledge is derogatory to the dig-
nity of a Christian, and opposed to his love and trust in
Providence, and militates against the spread of the
lungdom of God. Any method of divination with
direct invocation of spirits is grievously sinful, and
worse still if such intervention ensues; with tacit
invocation divination is in itself a grievous sin, though
in practice, ignorance, simplicity, or want of belief may
render it venial. If, however, notwithstanding the
client's disbelief the diviner acts seriously, the client
cannot be easily excused from grievously sinful co-
operation. If in methods apparently harmless strong
suspicion of evil intervention arises it would be sinful
to continue ; if only a doubt arise as to the natural or
diabolical character of the effect protest should be
made against the intervention of spirits; if in doubt
as to whether it be from God or Satan, except a mirac-
ulous act be sought (which would be extremely rare),
it should be discontinued under pain of sin. A pro-
testation of not wishing diabolical interference in
modes of divination where it is expressly or tacitly ex-
pected is of no avail, as actions speak louder than
words. A scientific investigator in doubt about the
adequacy of the means can experiment to see if such
superhuman intervention be a fact, but he should
clearly express his opposition to all diabolical assist-
ance. The divining-rod, if used only for metals or
water, may perhaps be explained naturally; if used
for detecting guilty persons, or things lost or stolen
as such (which may be metals), it is certainly a tacit
method. To believe in most of the popular signs is
simply ignorance or weakness of mind (see Soper-
stition).
DiviN.^TioN IN THE BiBLE. — The Hebrews coming from Egypt, a land teeming with diviners, and dwell- ing in a country surrounded by superstitious tribes would have their inborn desire for foreknowledge in- tensified by the spirit of the times and their environ- ments ; but God forbade them repeatedly to have any- thing to do with charmers, wizards, diviners, necro- mancers, etc., all of whom were abomination in His sight (Deut., xviii, 10, 11). The ideal was in Ba- laam's day when "there is no soothsaying in Jacob nor divination in Israel" (Num., xxiii, 23), and to preserve this, the soul that went aside after diviners God declared He would destroy (Lev., xx, 6), and the man or woman in whom there was a divining spirit was to be stoned to death (Lev., xx, 27). God, how- ever, as St. Chrysostom puts it, humoured the Hebrews like children, and to preserve them from excess! ve temp- tation, lots were allowed under certain conditions (Jos., vii, 14; Num., xxvi, 5.5; Prov., xvi, 33, and in N. T. See also Lot.s). Helirew seers were permitted to an- swer when it plea.sed Him (Origen, c. Cels., I, xxxvi, xxxvii), prophets might be consulted on private affairs (I K.,ix,0), and the high priest could respond in greater matters by the Urim and Thummim. Gifts were offered to seers ami prophets when consulted, but the great prophets accepted no reward when they acted as God's representatives (IV K., v, 20). When the
