Witchcraft & Heresy Lesson 7

Lesson 2 and description, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Original: As I have mentioned in one of my responses, I understand the potentiality of danger in learning or simply reading about necromancy, especially during that time period. I recognize the enticement of such material to the people of the Middle Ages, which really isn’t any different from the enticement it still carries today. However the knowledge of “magical” or occult subjects are more widespread and aren’t wholly taken seriously by the general public at large, only smaller groups of individuals in our culture still practice this seriously. However, I would not go out and state that even little knowledge of this subject should be of danger of any sort, because essentially, I do not find the magical practices dangerous. I am not discussing my beliefs or disbelief in the practices themselves, but merely the dangers of them. From the material we have covered thus far of exceeding number of literature versus lack of evidence, I personally don’t find danger in the magic alone.
I can see the resemblance of what Kieckhefer refers necromancy as the merger of astral magic and exorcism. Necromancy relies on astral magic in terms of its peculiar procedures and schedules of collecting and manipulating materials. Exorcism by definition is the process of expelling or seeking and evil spirit by adjurations or religious or solemn ceremonies. This is what necromancy also consists of, whether they are considered good or evil spirits is a matter of opinion of the people and the Church, but the seeking of such spirits does occur whether it be for good or for ill purposes.
Response to a student who responded to original: You have an interesting point but also as I have brought up in my post to one of the previous question, people have an enormous fascination with the unknown. Whether they fear it or not, it still captivates them in some way. I am definitely one of those people, however I find it ever the more fascinating because I am also interested with the mere fact that others are drawn to it as well as people fear the unknown. As a whole, I think it's quite something to think about and notice about different societies.
Student response #1: Although I do agree with some of your sentiments, there are some points in which I don’t entirely agree with. For instance, you said that necromancy was more extreme and strictly satanic, therefore wholly feared. Necromancy, however, was not always used for bad purposes, must I remind you of love spells, and answers of the past, present, and/or future. There are plenty of good or even amoral purposes of necromancy but regardless, as you pointed out they were still feared. Magic may have been feared, but that does not imply that it was neither all extreme nor wholly bad. Given you feel this way and the account that Kieckhefer describes that a good amount of the necromancers were clerics, this would conclude that you feel these clerics are strictly satanic.
Student response #2: I feel quite inclined to agree with the first half of your post, particularly about how you feel the lack of danger there is in learning such information about necromancy. Well, I understand the possibility or capacity for danger in learning such a subject during that time period, but I feel in this modern mind state, similar to you, that there should not necessarily be a negative implication or even stigma for persons learning , simply reading or recognizing necromancy. However, I have to somewhat disagree with the last portion of your post. In regards to the lectures on Scandinavian magic as well as Celtic, I don’t necessary think Christianity was the sole influencer of paganism, rather paganism influenced Christianity. For example, there was a mention in the lecture that Christianity used pagan stories but changed the names and other slight details to incorporate into their Christian literature. They used paganism rather than getting rid of it altogether, thus attracting a larger following.