One day, a man walks past his son's bedroom, and hears some strange noises. He decides to investigate, and of course finds what every parent dreads they will find their child doing. There he is, staring intently at a graphic porn video on his computer. Normally, this would be an embarrassing scenario for everyone involved, but surprisingly, the son doesn't even flinch. He's fully clothed, and isn't seated in any different a way than he would be if he was watching a documentary. And it turns out, this is exactly what, in his mind, he is doing. "It's ok," the son confidently assures his father. "I'm just watching it for research."
Do you buy the son's excuse? Is research a sufficient reason to justify porn? I think you'll agree, whether you're a Catholic or a Christian, that only a very bad father would say "oh, my apologies, carry on". Biblically, porn is wrong. The Bible does not say those words. It does not say "you shall not watch porn". Nor does it mention computers. Nor does it mention watching people have sex for research purposes. But we can show that porn is wrong because the Bible does condemn fornication. Even if the people in a porn video are married, it is wrong to observe them enjoying their marital acts because you are not married to them.
I honestly feel like I'm preaching to the choir in this case. My target audience are Catholics and Christians, so there should be a virtual consensus on my belief that not even research can justify porn. But what if I told you Catholics are like that young man, staring at a screen for reasons he considers so innocent, he isn't even fazed when his father catches him?
Biblically speaking, it is wrong to talk to the dead. In Deuteronomy 18:10-12, we read "Let there not be found among you anyone who causes their son or daughter to pass through the fire, or practices divination, or is a soothsayer, augur, or sorcerer, or who casts spells, consults ghosts and spirits, or seeks oracles from the dead. Anyone who does such things is an abomination to the Lord, and because of such abominations the Lord, your God, is dispossessing them before you." Isaiah would later go on to say "And when they say to you, “Inquire of ghosts and soothsayers who chirp and mutter; should not a people inquire of their gods, consulting the dead on behalf of the living, for instruction and testimony?” Surely, those who speak like this are the ones for whom there is no dawn." (Isaiah 8:19-20). To avoid accusations of poor translation, I have used the NABRE for both citations, a popular Catholic translation.
We see, then, that the dead cannot be legitimately contacted. But Catholics do contact the dead. They are particularly fond of Mary, whom they have effectively turned into a goddess. Their excuses for this vary, first beginning with the difference in covenants.
It is accurate to say that Deuteronomy as a whole is a part of the Old Covenant. Under the Old Covenant, there are many different laws that we, as Christians, are no longer required to obey. We can eat "unclean" animals, like pork. We can wear mixed fabrics, we can get tattoos, we don't have to kill witches. But that doesn't mean we can become witches. Note, first of all, that Deuteronomy 18:10-12 talks about things which are an abomination to the Lord, and that this is the very reason the Canaanites were being removed from the land of Israel. Thus, it is clear that some commands within the Old Covenant remain in force in spite of it. This is why we cannot steal, murder, or commit adultery. These are morally wrong things that were outlawed in the Old Covenant, but remain immoral even in the New. Seeking the dead is one of those immoral things.
Ah, but they're not dead, are they? They're alive in Heaven! Isn't that what Christ says about Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? (Matthew 22:32). Indeed. But though alive in Heaven, they remain dead on the Earth. The Bible does in fact say that each of these men died. Genesis 25:8 says Abraham "breathed his last and died". Genesis 35:29 likewise says Isaac breathed his last and died. Genesis 49:33 omits the word "died", but still says Jacob breathed his last, and he was gathered to his people. So, while Jesus says they are still living in Heaven, scripture says each of them died.
In fact, the context of Matthew 22:32 is a discussion about whether or not there will be a resurrection, which Jesus is here answering in the affirmative. The resurrection of which He spoke had not yet happened, and in our day is still yet to occur. Note what Paul says about that day: "For the Lord himself, with a word of command, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God, will come down from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first." (1 Thessalonians 4:16).
Did you catch that? The dead in Christ will rise first. This phrase is a big deal. So big, in fact, that I have often used it around Catholics, and received rebuke from them, because "they're not dead". I used the same language Paul used in scripture, yet because it contradicts their theology, they oppose such a phrase.
So, clearly the dead in Christ are, in fact, dead in Christ. Therefore, it is immoral to contact them. This should be apparent in the command itself. Aside from the fact there is no explicit distinction in the command between the dead in Christ and the lost to sin, the command was given to Israel, where it can be assumed a fair few of the dead would be dead in Christ. At the very least, prophets, such as Samuel, could be reasonably assumed to make it to Paradise. Yet, Samuel is the one and only example in scripture of a successful attempt to contact the dead (1 Samuel 28:8-19). When disturbed, however, he was angry. He couldn't intercede for Saul, nor could he deliver any message to Saul than that which he already knew. Thus, Saul's sin was for nothing.
Another excuse Catholics use is to suggest that, since God tells us to pray for one another, it is reasonable to assume He would want us to ask the saints to pray for us, since they (you know, being dead and all) have "more direct access" to God. There are two main problems with this. The first is that actually, they do not have more direct access to God than we do. Hebrews 4:16 tells us that we can come boldly before the throne of grace to receive mercy and grace in a time of need. Through Christ, we have the most direct access to God we possibly can. To imagine the saints can somehow twist His arm for us is a denial of the very Gospel, as it downplays Christ's role as the one who reconciles us to God.
The second problem, however, is that the Bible never commands us not to talk to the living, but it does command us not to talk to the dead. There is, therefore, a difference between asking the dead in Christ to pray for us and asking the living to pray for us. The former involves breaking a command of God in some strange attempt to follow another. The latter involves following the command of God without breaking another.
It seems abundantly clear, then, that there is no scenario in which communicating with the dead, even the dead in Christ, is any more acceptable than porn. You can modify the scenario as much as you like, and in doing so, you may, eventually, escape the letter of the law. The spirit of the law, however, remains firm, and so we can condemn the Catholic practice of necromancy regardless of how innocent such acts seem to Catholics.